Table Of ContentPROFITS, WAGES, AND PRODUCTIVITY
IN THE BUSINESS CYCLE
PROFITS, WA GES, AND PRODUCTIVITY
IN THE BUSINESS CYCLE
A KALDORIAN ANALYSIS
MITSUHIKO IYODA
Momoyama Gakuin Daigaku Osaka, Japan
SPRINGER SCIENCE+BUSINESS MEDIA, LLC
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Iyoda, Mitsuhiko, 1943-
Profits, wages, and produetivity in the business eyde : a
Kaldorian analysis / by Mitsuhiko Iyoda.
p. em.
Originally presented as the author's thesis (doetoral)-University
of Buekingham, 1994.
Indudes bibliographieal referenees and index.
ISBN 978-94-010-6260-2 ISBN 978-94-011-5376-8 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-94-011-5376-8
1. Business eydes. 2. Income distribution. 3. Kaldor, Nieholas,
1908-1986. I. Title.
HB3714.195 1997
338.5'4 2-de21 96-40418
CIP
Copyright © 1997 by Springer Science+Business Media New York
Originally published by Kluwer Academic Publishers in 1997
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1997
All rights reserved. No part of this publieation may be reprodueed, stored in a retrieval
system or transmitted in any form or by any means, meehanieal, photo-eopying, reeording,
or otherwise, without the prior written permission ofthe publisher, Springer Science+Busi
ness Media. LLC
Printed on acid~free paper.
CONTENTS
List of Figures lX
List of Tables xi
Preface xiii
Acknowledgments xv
Abbreviations xix
1. Introduction 1
2. Some Facts About the Typical Business Cycle 5
Some Facts in General 5
Comparative Methods 6
Equations for Calculation 6
Data 8
Results in Detail 10
The Labor Share 10
The Profit Rate 14
Labor Productivity 14
The Real Wage Rate 17
The Relationship Between the Estimates with and Without LIS 22
Factors Conditioning Interpretations 23
Stylized Facts and Some Explanations of These Facts 24
Stylized Facts 24
Some Explanations of the Stylized Facts 27
v
vi Contents
Appendix 2A: Methods of Imputation and Their Validity 30
Appendix 2B: Data 31
Appendix 2C: Tables 35
3. Kaldor's Model 49
Kaldor's Model 50
A Model 50
Restraint Conditions to the Model 51
Interpretation 52
Reformulation of the Model 53
Further Interpretation 54
Comments 57
Pasinetti's Question 57
Capital Coefficient, v 58
An Assumption of the Full Employment 59
Historical Constancies 59
Kaldor's Recognition 59
Arguments on the Historical Constancies 61
Conclusions: Some Remarks on Kaldor's Model 62
Appendix 3A: A Neoclassical Model of Income Distribution
In Comparison with Kaldor's Model 63
4. Kaldorian Models: Two Applied Models 69
Model A: An Employment Decision Approach 70
Assumptions and Notations 70
Model A 71
Model A: A Solution and Restraint Conditions 73
Model A: An Analysis in Comparative Statics 74
A Brief Summary: Concluding Remarks on Model A 77
Model B: A Markup Pricing Approach 78
Introduction 78
Model B 79
Model B: A Solution and Restraint Conditions 80
Model B: An Analysis in Comparative Statics 83
A Brief Summary: Concluding Remarks on Model B 86
Conclusions: Some Remarks on Models A and B 87
Fundamental Characteristics of the Two Models 87
The Characteristics of the Model and the Validity 88
Appendix 4A: Model A: On Solution 89
Appendix 4B: Equations for Comparative Statics 90
Appendix 4C: A Model (1976) 94
Appendix 4D: Model B: On Solution 96
Appendix 4E: The First Partial Derivative and Growth-Rate Equations 98
5. Other Models 109
The Real Business Cycle Theory 110
Introduction 110
The Models 110
Some Comments 114
The New Keynesian Theory 117
Introduction 117
The Theory 117
Some Comments 121
Conclusions: Some Remarks on Each Theory 127
Contents vii
6. Conclusions 133
Summary 133
Methodological Research Agenda 136
Determinants of investment 136
Government Policy and International Trade 137
Test of the Models and Model Calibration 138
Questions Remaining for the Future 139
References 141
Index 147
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 Cyclical Indicators or Diffusion Index 9
Figure 2.2a Share of Labor in National Income (percent), United Kingdom 11
Figure 2.2b Change in Labor's Share of National Income, United Kingdom 11
Figure 2.3a Share of Labor in National Income (percent), United States 12
Figure 2.3b Change in Labor's Share of National Income, United States 12
Figure 2.4a Share of Labor in National Income (percent), Japan 13
Figure 2.4b Change in Labor's Share of National Income, Japan 13
Figure 2.5a Rate of Profits (percent), United Kingdom 15
Figure 2.5b Rate of ProfIts (percent), United Kingdom 15
Figure 2.6 Rate of ProfIts (percent), United States 16
Figure 2.7 Rate of Profits (percent), Japan 16
Figure 2.8a Change in Labor Productivity (percent), United Kingdom 18
Figure 2.8b Change in Unit Labor Costs (percent), United Kingdom 18
Figure 2.9a Change in Labor Productivity (percent), United States 19
Figure 2.9b Change in Unit Labor Costs (percent), United States 19
Figure 2. lOa Change in Labor Productivity (percent), Japan 20
Figure 2.10b Change in Unit Labor Costs (percent), Japan 20
Figure 2.11 Change in the Real Wage Rate (percent), United Kingom 21
Figure 2.12 Change in the Real Wage Rate (percent), United States 21
Figure 2.13 Change in the Real Wage Rate (percent), Japan 22
Figure 5.1 Windfall ProfIts and Losses in Imperfect Competition 123
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Trough and Peak Years After Adjustments for the United Kingdom,
United States, and Japan, 1970 to 1992 9
Table 2.2 Summary of Number of Observations 25
Table 2.3 Summary of Number of Observations 25
Table 2.4 Contingency Table on the Symmetrical Change of Macroeconomic
Variables in the Business Cycle 26-7
Table 2.5 Coincident Indicator (JP: Diffusion Index) 35
Table 2.6 Share of Labor in National Income (percent), United Kingdom 36
Table 2.7 Share of Labor in National Income (percent), United States 36
Table 2.8 Share of Labor in National Income (percent), Japan 37
Table 2.9 Rate of Profits (percent), United Kingdom 37
Table 2.10 Rate of Profits (percent), United States 38
Table 2.11 Rate of Profits (percent), Japan 38
Table 2.12 Annual Change in Labor Productivity and Unit Labor costs (percent),
United Kingdom 39
Table 2.13 Annual Change in Labor Productivity and Unit Labor Costs (percent),
United States 40
Table 2.14 Annual Change in Labor Productivity and Unit Labor costs (percent),
Japan 41
Table 2.15 Annual Change in the Real Wage Rate (percent), United Kingdom 41
Table 2.16 Annual Change in the Real Wage Rate (percent), United States 42
Table 2.17 Annual Change in the Real Wage Rate (percent), Japan 42
xi
PREFACE
This book attempts to explain the changes in specifiC macroeconomic vari
ables-such as the relative share oflabor, the profIt rate, and the real wage rate
in advanced capitalist economies-in relation to the influence of the business
cycle in income distribution.
In the pursuit of this inquiry, I fIrSt establish some stylized facts that I wish
to investigate. The three countries discussed here-the United Kingdom, the
United States, and Japan-are observed over a period of twenty-two years
beginning in 1970, which covers at least three business cycles.
This study makes several assumptions. First, there is no common feature
on whether labor share moves countercyclically or procyclically; however,
labor share increases in the fIrst year of contraction and decreases in the fIrst
year of expansion, though there are some exceptions. Second, the profIt rate
moves pro cyclically . Third, labor productivity moves pro cyclically and shows
a symmetrical change; productivity sharply increases in the fIrSt year of
expansion in terms of the growth rate and decreases in the fIrst year of con
traction. Fourth, the real wage rate has no common feature. Finally, labor
shares with and without "labor income of self-employment" imputed from
self-employment income are almost parallel (except for Japan), and their move
ments are also similar, though they move differently for some years.
To explain these facts, I examine three types of model (or theory)-Kaldorian
theory, real-business-cycle theory, and new Keynesian theory-but the focus
is on Kaldor's approach-hence, the book's subtitle, A Kaldorian Analysis.
xiii
xiv Preface
Kaldor's original model ofincome distribution, which he called the Keynesian
theory, was the model of full employment (1955-1956). I discuss this model,
including his background for model construction in relation to historical con
stancies. One of the strongest criticisms of his model is that it is incomplete
in the underemployment economy. Some Keynesians complete the model
by introducing the fIrSt postulate of the classical theory of employment,
which was maintained by Keynes himself. I present two alternative Kaldorian
models that are based on Kaldor's standpoint and do not include the marginal
productivity principles. Unlike Kaldor's original model, these two alternative
models are explicitly constructed in both nominal (money) and gross terms.
Model A, the employment-decision approach, and Model B, the markup
pricing approach represent crucial assumptions and functions. Model B may
be called a Kaleckian type. Model A is based on an assumption that employ
ment is a positive function of investment. Labor productivity is also a positive
function of employment that reflects the operating rate of capital and a kind
of labor hoarding in the business cycle.
Under the limited conditions of my Kaldorian models (they are simple
and in the short run), I show that the models have a fairly good interpretat
ive value. The employment-decision-approach model, for example, has the
potential for explaining most of my stylized facts.
Although this book is not a comprehensive study of real-business-cycle
(RBC) theory and new Keynesian (NK) theory, I assess each from the view
point of my present purpose of research. Plosser's paper "Understanding Real
Business Cycles" (1989) and Ball, Mankiw, and Romer's paper "The New
Keynesian Economics and the Output-Inflation Trade-Off" (1988) are pre
sented as representative of each of these theories, respectively. These models
are less concerned about explaining stylized facts in the business cycle and
have diffIculty in explaining the change of variables in the labor market, par
ticularly the relative share of labor and productivity.
My two alternative Kaldorian models are fairly effective in explaining the
changes of macroeconomic variables in the business cycle. However, these
models suggest a research agenda for future work-namely-determinants
of investment, government policy and international trade, and the test of the
models and model calibration.
Some questions remain regarding further development of these models,
particularly the employment-decision model-testing the model, determining
the treatment of the money wage rate (which I have treated as given), extend
ing the model to the long run, and fmally, if these investigations can be done
successfully, fully developing arguments about policy relevance.
